Next New Sequential Instrument

[LPF83]

I know some people would be absolutely thrilled if Dave reissued a Pro One, T8, VS and hell, why not a DrumTrax too....but at some point Dave isn't going to be around anymore and then the rest of the team is left to play "catch up" with other companies who have surpassed them.

I'd like to think these guys will continue making great products through Sequential/Oberheim once Dave and Tom are no longer in the business, but if not they will have a hell of a resume in the audio hardware field and lots of other companies would be interested in their skills.  Moog continues on without Bob.. Focusrite continues on without Rupert.  I see Sequential/Oberheim doing same so I'm sure current employees could keep going under those brands if they wanted.

We are in an age of morphing analog synthesizers now, polyphonic aftertouch, and Behringer releasing $200 clones....pretty soon $3000-5000 stripped down synths with minimum features is going to be a more and more difficult sell.

I'm not sure about that one, because every time I look on Reverb I keep seeing older stripped down synths with minimum features on a skyward resale price trajectory, while the more recently released feature-rich ones tend to drop in value.  The Sequential/Oberheim gear I'm buying today is a future goldmine... not that I would want to, but I'm pretty sure that in 10-20 years I could sell just one of them and buy multiple junk brand synths with the proceeds.

[LoboLives]

As much as I love the "reissues", because they are dream machines for me... but now with OB-X8 and P10R4 the two (IMHO) most important synth of this companies available again, they really should start to think forward again. I'm in Lobo's team in this case.

What about this Poly Pro3 everybody was hoping for a while ago? Add a second wavetable osc and make it at least 8 voices and I would sell my PEAK for it. It's not that I don't like the PEAK, it's a fantastic synth and I also like the updates Novation is giving to it now and then. But after using my Rev2 and PEAK side by side for some years now, I recognized that I like the Sequential way of doing things more.

The question remains though...will Focusrite allow Sequential to do such a synth for fear of cutting into Summit/Peak sales?

[LoboLives]

For the time being. Everything is circular. What might seem to depreciate today could sky rocket in 10 to 20 years and vice versa. I’ve seen a lot of trends go for insane amounts of money at the time that you couldn’t sell for $25 today.

[LPF83]

For the time being. Everything is circular. What might seem to depreciate today could sky rocket in 10 to 20 years and vice versa. I’ve seen a lot of trends go for insane amounts of money at the time that you couldn’t sell for $25 today.

Fair point..  and one reason I never buy musical instruments solely as an investment.  Nothing is guaranteed.  Buy the ones you like the sound of and it always works out.

[LPF83]

As much as I love the "reissues", because they are dream machines for me... but now with OB-X8 and P10R4 the two (IMHO) most important synth of this companies available again, they really should start to think forward again. I'm in Lobo's team in this case.

Just some food for thought... check out from about 11 or 12 minutes on where Marcus begins talking about the importance of limitations, and how they had to intentionally recreate limitations in order to make the sounds of the vintage units possible....

https://forum.sequential.com/index.php/topic,213.msg58838.html#msg58838

... and remember, the whole reason the industry goes nuts over a Prophet or an Obie reissue is because of the sounds they made 40 years ago, and the fact that all of the technology advancements since have not been able to match their pleasant tones.

So I'm all for technological progress as soon as some of the innovative synths actually find a way to surpass the sound of the vintage ones.  What sounds good is no doubt subjective, but if anyone prefers the sound of all these harsh / cold
 / plastic sounding synths, why would they be looking at Sequential / Oberheim in the first place?   There are so many low cost options out there if someone wants a colder sound with lots of options.  Analog synths are typically either going to have less options, or a price tag most won't bite.  Then at the extreme end you have something like the Moog One which is both analog and feature rich, but I've still yet to hear a single sound from one that inspired me to buy one.

[LoboLives]

  What sounds good is no doubt subjective, but if anyone prefers the sound of all these harsh / cold
 / plastic sounding synths, why would they be looking at Sequential / Oberheim in the first place?   There are so many low cost options out there if someone wants a colder sound with lots of options.  Analog synths are typically either going to have less options, or a price tag most won't bite. 

"  What sounds good is no doubt subjective, but if anyone prefers the sound of all these harsh / cold
 / plastic sounding synths, why would they be looking at Sequential / Oberheim in the first place? "

Prophet 2000
Prophet VS
Poly Evolver
Prophet 12
Prophet X

Digital Hybrids aren't out of the realm of Sequential at all. Why would anyone be looking at the company is because they enjoy the workflow of Sequential synths or a sense a familiarity as oppose to trying to learn a whole new workflow from scratch. Plus Sequential has developed things that have become common place on their synths that other brands don't have. The reason why I would want a hybrid from Sequential to get those Prophet VS/Wavetable/FM tones is because of the other options out there.

-Modal Argon 8 -Monotimbral (Prophet VS, Poly Evolver, Prophet 12, Prophet X are all bi-timbral so it's more than likely Sequential's would allow splits and layers which is crucial to me in my compositions)

-ASM HydraSynth-Monotimbral-and the Deluxe version is too big for my liking. No on board sequencer (which is something that is crucial to me (It frees up space and chords and allows me to preview how a sequence would sound as oppose to having to plug an external device in)

-UDO Super 6-Limited Wavetable options (only available on one oscillator and also static single cycle waves), no screen (which I would prefer on a Hybrid) and also monotimbral. Limited effects (On board effects are crucial to me as they free up space and especially if I can interact with them in the modulation matrix like I can with Sequential synths)

-Novation Summit-No sequencer, limited effects but it's the closest contender as a "Good enough" or "Passable" option should Sequential throw in the towel on forward thinking synths.


"Analog synths are typically either going to have less options, or a price tag most won't bite."

or in the case of the Prophet 5, ARP 2600 FS, Model D and OBX8----both.

[LPF83]

  What sounds good is no doubt subjective, but if anyone prefers the sound of all these harsh / cold
 / plastic sounding synths, why would they be looking at Sequential / Oberheim in the first place?   There are so many low cost options out there if someone wants a colder sound with lots of options.  Analog synths are typically either going to have less options, or a price tag most won't bite. 

"  What sounds good is no doubt subjective, but if anyone prefers the sound of all these harsh / cold
 / plastic sounding synths, why would they be looking at Sequential / Oberheim in the first place? "

Prophet 2000
Prophet VS
Poly Evolver
Prophet 12
Prophet X

Digital Hybrids aren't out of the realm of Sequential at all. Why would anyone be looking at the company is because they enjoy the workflow of Sequential synths or a sense a familiarity as oppose to trying to learn a whole new workflow from scratch. Plus Sequential has developed things that have become common place on their synths that other brands don't have. The reason why I would want a hybrid from Sequential to get those Prophet VS/Wavetable/FM tones is because of the other options out there.

-Modal Argon 8 -Monotimbral (Prophet VS, Poly Evolver, Prophet 12, Prophet X are all bi-timbral so it's more than likely Sequential's would allow splits and layers which is crucial to me in my compositions)

-ASM HydraSynth-Monotimbral-and the Deluxe version is too big for my liking. No on board sequencer (which is something that is crucial to me (It frees up space and chords and allows me to preview how a sequence would sound as oppose to having to plug an external device in)

-UDO Super 6-Limited Wavetable options (only available on one oscillator and also static single cycle waves), no screen (which I would prefer on a Hybrid) and also monotimbral. Limited effects (On board effects are crucial to me as they free up space and especially if I can interact with them in the modulation matrix like I can with Sequential synths)

-Novation Summit-No sequencer, limited effects but it's the closest contender as a "Good enough" or "Passable" option should Sequential throw in the towel on forward thinking synths.

"Analog synths are typically either going to have less options, or a price tag most won't bite."

I've never seen an onboard sequencer that was a good sequencer, but admittedly part of that may be that my requirement of a sequencer as one that can control multiple instruments.   Why not Waldorf Iridium?

Anyway I think the workstation market caters to folks that want the swiss army knife approach.  In terms of keeping with Sequential UI/workflow I'm also kind of surprised you don't own a Rev2.  For great FM tones, a used P12 module would be a great choice -- or the Access Virus TI2.. people don't think of it for that purpose but it's actually great at FM and Wavetable tones, sounding like a PPG Wave when asked to do so, plus the overall sound design capabilities and all the modulation options and effects are off the charts, lots of voices and 16 part multitimbral.

The step LFOs of the Hydrasynth are sort of like a sequencer, btw, and the most recent FW update added the ability to adjust step pitch with entering keyboard notes.

Or, like I said... get a workstation from Roland, Korg etc.  The only thing wrong with workstations is they are disliked by folks like me who want each instrument to have its own personality and don't like the feature-rich all-in-one approach.  In terms of learning new workflow that just comes with time with each instrument.

or in the case of the Prophet 5, ARP 2600 FS, Model D and OBX8----both.

What led to the conclusion most didn't bite on these?  As I understand it Prophets sold and still selling like hotcakes...  ARP 2600 FS and Model D reissue were limited editions (which would cap sales numbers), and lots of people saying they've already preordered the OB-X8 even with only a few sound demos available.

[LoboLives]

We obviously have different approaches and philosophies when it comes to music and instruments 

I found with workstations, I was spending more time programming and less time composing and recording. I've had an FA-08, Kronos and Kurzweil 2600XS, I'm over it.


I think the Waldorf Quantum/Iridium stuff sounds fantastic but I just can't seem to get along with UI and I tend to find they are trying to be too many things at once as oppose to focusing on a specific form of synthesis/sound design. This is why I get along with the Prophet X so well as opposed to the Quantum. It's main focus is samples being used as oscillators and using subtractive synthesis techniques with them and that's it. The Waldorf stuff has this obviously, but it also has VA, Wavetable, FM, Granular stuff too....it tends to spark more option paralysis rather than inspiration to me.

[LoboLives]

Also the interview with Marcus is simply stating that the limitations were due to what they had at the time but the benefit now is we have the option to choose to have those limitations or not as opposed to being forced to. That’s not really an endorsement of those limitations or saying they are better but simply stating the user now has more options available.

In fact I think it would be a nice firmware update for the P6 or OB6 to have a Global “vintage mode” that you can turn on or off which restricts the value of the parameters.